Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: HawkerMKII on June 26, 2003, 04:29:57 PM
-
WTG on the hard work in making a map, i know its not an easy thing to do
. I HOPE THIS THING IS GONE ON FRIDAY!!!!
Please do some work on this map before we get it back,,,,,,way to many PT spawns, spawn points to the middle of the water??
I am sad to see that many people wont fly the big map anymore and a few of my squad member wont. Are these BIG map what we are going to see from now on?? Sorry to say i hope not, but i know i am wrong.
-
Originally posted by HawkerMKII
WTG on the hard work in making a map, i know its not an easy thing to do . I HOPE THIS THING IS GONE ON FRIDAY!!!!
Please do some work on this map before we get it back,,,,,,way to many PT spawns, spawn points to the middle of the water??
I am sad to see that many people wont fly the big map anymore and a few of my squad member wont. Are these BIG map what we are going to see from now on?? Sorry to say i hope not, but i know i am wrong.
Yes..it will be gone after the maint work is done tomorrow. HT has a revised version in house now (we dint talk about what changes were made). The next map should be Infinity II.
If you want to see the big maps go away, then do what you can to make AH fail. Of course that is a double edged sword...make the user base smaller and get smaller maps...HTC gets less money and goes out of business. Do the math :).
-
If you dont like the maps. Sit down with the terrain builder and make one then submit it to HT.
-
Can't believe I'm agreeing with a MAW :) But I do...build your own and submit it..I'd be willing to bet that some won't like yours either... as the saying goes "You can make some people happy some of the time but you can't..etc etc" you get the drift I assume...LOL
-
I really wish you guys would give these mapmakers a break.
They take their time and energy to improve on gameplay and it's fair to criticize and make suggestions but there's no need to be insulting.
To all the mapmakers we appreciate your efforts and thank you for making aces high a better gaming environment.
-
It's really funny reading the whines concerning the new maps. A couple of years ago in AW3, the only way to see a new map was to fly in a different arena.
If you think you can do a better map then go ahead, and don't give me that I pay 14.99 stuff. Considering how much time was spent on this code and the constant improvements that are made to this product, it is a steal!
Just my opinion.
-
I guess we have to live with the map whining, but that is no big deal.
Atleast we have the map rotation that switch maps every friday and I think that was a brilliant solution.
There is no way everyone can be pleased by all maps, we all have our favorites and hated ones :)
stick with it or stay out the period your hate map is on.
(mine is akdesert not because its a bad map but because i cant see properly in it, im paritally colourblind and somthing in that map is bad for me)
-
to the mapmakers. You are doing a great job guys. Keep up the good work:)
-
yeah, besides I think Big Isles is very, very good. Once all the bugs and minor issues are solved it'll be the best map we have. IMO.
(http://image1ex.villagephotos.com/extern/640697.jpg)
-
If beating me with a stick is doing me a favor then... don't do me any favors..
All the mapmakers have one thing in common.. they favor one type of gameplay and late war planes... they all feel that 2 sectors between fights is lovely and 10 minute flights and "missuns' and gangbangs are the way of the future.
they don't represent the action crowd at all.
In fairness... If there is a cv fight in the "bigisles" then all is well... If infinity is revised it may be ok too. have to wait and see.
lazs
-
I think that the BigIsle map is GREAT !!!
Yes it does need some tweaking like NoBaddy did to Trinity (Trinity II), like changing some of those one-way to nowhere GV bases to airfields to cut down on most of the 2+ sectors flights to the action.
There are still a few bugs left, but none that are real show stoppers as far as I am concerned.
<> To the map makers ... keep up the good work.
-
am I the only person who thinks of this:
(http://www.bastetkatz.com/Mr._Bigglesworth.jpg)
whenever he reads "bigisles"
-Sik
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
am I the only person who thinks of this:
whenever he reads "bigisles"
-Sik
LOL!
-
I personnally like the bigisles map. When I first saw it I thought wow a great PTO style map. This will be great for carrier battles and for the manly blue planes (TM)
But about the only time I see the carriers involved is CV vs airfield. I think I've only seen one CV vs CV battle so far. Then someone decides that they need to lvl bomb the CV with B-17s. A map like this really needs to disable all the lvl bombers and force the opposing CVs to launch divebomb and torpedo attacks.
I think if people got into the mindset that this is a map designed for sea battles we'd all get much more fun out of it.
Sharky
-
Originally posted by Sharky
I personnally like the bigisles map. When I first saw it I thought wow a great PTO style map. This will be great for carrier battles and for the manly blue planes (TM)
But about the only time I see the carriers involved is CV vs airfield. I think I've only seen one CV vs CV battle so far. Then someone decides that they need to lvl bomb the CV with B-17s. A map like this really needs to disable all the lvl bombers and force the opposing CVs to launch divebomb and torpedo attacks.
I think if people got into the mindset that this is a map designed for sea battles we'd all get much more fun out of it.
Sharky
I have seen many CV vs CV battles on this map, more than any other map that we have. I have steered many a CV group into such a battle - typically when a CV Group is attacking an airfield and we have a CV Group nearby.
CV vs Airfield are the best fights going ... nothing wrong with this scenario as far as I am concerned. Some of us that enjoy these fights have actually been able to ask the bomber boys to hold back on sinking a CV group so that the battle can continue ... some have obliged ... some haven't. Sink the destroyer and support ships all you want ... just leave the Carrier alone unless things get out of hand.
Disabling level bombers .... your joking ? ... right ?
-
So far I'd give a thumbs up to this map. I've been involved in many task force vs task force battles, and they are a blast. It also doesn't seem like I have to fly far to find a fight here.
A salute to the map maker.
And a salute to all map makers. I don't particularly like Pizza, but I give the guys who made it credit and I respect them for taking the time to try to make the game better.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
All the mapmakers have one thing in common.. they favor one type of gameplay and late war planes... they all feel that 2 sectors between fights is lovely and 10 minute flights and "missuns' and gangbangs are the way of the future.
they don't represent the action crowd at all.
lazs
Nice generalizaton, Lazs.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
If beating me with a stick is doing me a favor then... don't do me any favors..
All the mapmakers have one thing in common.. they favor one type of gameplay and late war planes... they all feel that 2 sectors between fights is lovely and 10 minute flights and "missuns' and gangbangs are the way of the future.
they don't represent the action crowd at all.
In fairness... If there is a cv fight in the "bigisles" then all is well... If infinity is revised it may be ok too. have to wait and see.
lazs
Lazs, Hitech is the one that decides the criteria for field separation. Obviously you've never talked to him about designing a map for the MA. Perhaps now that I've enlightened you, your opinion of map makers will be revised? If not, please continue on in your ignorance.
-
I like the new map. hopefully that wont get my head chewed off :)
There are good and bad maps and they aint easy to make.
I say appreciate the work thats gone into them.You dont have to like them but at least be thankfull they have tried.
And like people have said here make your own if you want better.
Btw you can , if your no programmer type, send HTC a drawing and explanation of your map design. They have said before that they will consider any map ideas sent to them.So 'I cant make maps' isnt an excuse.
'I have no brain and cant even sketch a picture or write an explanation' ...........yeah, that might work! :D
-
That sounds pretty intersting, Hazed.
So one would simply sketch out a map on graph paper 512 x 512 showing elevations, field locations, etc?
I might be interested in doing this.
What must the hand drawn map encompass?
-
as to banning level bombers what a pile of horse manure that idea is! :) hehe
If you want carrier vs carrier battles this is the map to get them.
Ive run some 10 or so torpedo bombing missions in the last tour or so because i decided i will only ever attack a carrier with EITHER torpedoes or an aircraft that was likely to dive bomb the fleet.This means ill do ju87 SBD VAL etc.
Basically they havent been too successfull. One or two were superbly successfull but the majority are failures due to enemy fighters or manned guns on the fleet. This leads to people using the easier method of level bombing.
The reason is the limits imposed on the torpedoes compared to say a B17.
In the torpedo aircraft you must fly at 100 to 200 foot.
B17 can fly at any level
In torpedo aircraft you are forced to fly at 200mph or less (250 TBM)
B17 can fly any speed during drop
In the torpedo aircraft you are forced to drop your torpedo at around 2500 yards from the target(just about when the auto small arms AA starts to fire at you
B17 has no limit.you can drop your bombs in a vertical dive if you like and the bombs will fall normally.
other problems are the fleets travel at an abnormally fast speed yet the torpedoes travel at their realistic speed.This means that any shot in the rear hemisphere of the fleet has very little chance of even catching the fleet in time.
What id like to suggest is to make the torpedoes match the speeds of WW2 torpedoes BUT with a directly proportional increase in speed to match the fleets excessive speed.
So if the real essex class carrier cruised at 12 knots or so in WW2 yet here in AH its around 30 knots(?) we take the figure of the difference...18 knots and this should be added to the speed of the torpedoes thus they travel further and faster but only in proportion to AH's gameplay concession fleet speed.
This would mean, although graphically the torpedoes will be a little fast we will be using a more similar method of attack to what they used.it will mean we are able to take a shot with a torpedo from much further out.Requiring some skill and luck to hit but you are able to reverse and stay alive to watch the shots and learn what works and what doesnt.In AH now we are forced by the speed of the fleet to drop VERY close to the fleet and they are protected by an easy to use deadly AA system and 9 times out of 10 we die and dont even see if we were close or way off.
Result is people dont bother and just suicide it instead as its pretty much a garenteed sinking.sad but its human nature.
we need to make torpedo bombing more fun and a little bit easier to perform.Keep the slow speed drops, thats realistic and good for learning, speed up the torpedoes a little and give players a chance to take longer distance shots. Make it a bit more enjoyable this way and a few more will try this instead of suiciding or even level bombing im sure.
-
Hazed-
IIRC were'nt level bombers used to destroy shipping in WWII?
I know there were B-17's based at Pearl harbor and were slated to be used on anti-ship sorties.
Granted, Torpedo runs are so hard in this game, I don't even try them. Level bombing a moving ship is no cake walk either. I wouls say dive bombing is the most accurate method, but delivers the least amount of ordinance.
I'm wondering if there is any history of ships being sunk by level bombers in WWII.
-
Glad to see it gone. I really didn't fly while it was up, sat in the tower and sulked. Maybe a map larger than baltic but smaller than bigilses would work with bases as close as the small maps. Right now AH doesn't have enough player to use the super huge maps.
PS. would it even be worth getting invloved and submitting a map idea to HTC with the AH2 just around the corner. Will the current maps be used?
-
Disabling level bombers .... your joking ? ... right ?
Oh course. I know a lot of guys like flying lvl bombers, however on this map attacking the CVs with dive and torpedo bombers is seems more fitting. More Midwaylike if you will.
Unlike others I would never attempt to interject my play style on others, I'd just like to see the battles more befitting the environment.
Regards,
Sharky
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
Hazed-
IIRC were'nt level bombers used to destroy shipping in WWII?
I know there were B-17's based at Pearl harbor and were slated to be used on anti-ship sorties.
Granted, Torpedo runs are so hard in this game, I don't even try them. Level bombing a moving ship is no cake walk either. I wouls say dive bombing is the most accurate method, but delivers the least amount of ordinance.
I'm wondering if there is any history of ships being sunk by level bombers in WWII.
I heard about one time and that was Midway, they launced 17 (I think) b17s against the Japanese fleet and not one single bomb hit the target. I am not sure of the numbers but it was more than 10 bombers.
The problem is AH is the low level suicide and dive b26s and 17s that is really unrealistic and never happend in ww2.
-
Funny I enjoyed Big Isles more then any other map lately. Anything's better then the frame sapping,warp inducing and eye sore that is Pizza.
...-Gixer
-Hells Angels-
-
So what are you saying Gixer?:D
-
No carriers were ever sunk by level bombing in WWII.
Make about 99% of the GV fields into airfields and you would have a pretty good map.. What is the point of having a GV field a sector away from an airfield or right on an island anyhow? Why even have GV fields when every airfield has GV's?
lazs
-
I don't suppose it would be possible to make it so that any ordinance dropped from any plane other than a divebomber/ torpedo bomber wouldn't effect the CV or ships?
IE, you drop 14000 lbs from a Lanc smack on the CV deck...it does nada, nix, not a damn sausage. Do the same thing with far less weight of ord from a divebombing Ju88 or SBD or Val, and it is measured as usual.
Basically, is there any way to tell from which type of aircraft ordinance was dopped/ released? If it is, just make it so that planes that shouldnt be bombing CV groups can't...or at least, they can, but to zero effect?
Dunno...just an idea.
Blue
Er..yeah, back on topic...
I LIKE BigIsles, and Trinity too, just not so keen on Pizza.
I don't NOT like pizza, just prefer other maps.
-
To all the map makers: Thanks!
Hey, can you put some fields closer together? Long flights=limited fight time, only time is limited :(
-
If I remember right, HiTech wants all fields to be from .75 to 1.5 sectors apart. I think you'll find that all of the maps meet this requirement. You're also limited to 255 fields on large map. If you're in the designing mode you may want to consider field spacing before determining land mass.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Nice generalizaton, Lazs.
NB he just needs some really good Ice Cream to settle him down}:
:D
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
I'm wondering if there is any history of ships being sunk by level bombers in WWII.
The history is that level bombing was almost completely ineffective against shipping, except ships at rest.
culero
-
there is only the planes were level about 50 feet off the water. The B25's skipped their bombs into the side of Japanese ships. Very effective technique. The Japanese might have got a british ship early in the war, but can't quite remember.
-
I don't see a lot of fields 3/4 of a sector away and I do see a lot of places where the airfields are allmost 2 sectors away. I don't count a V field abeing close to an airfield as "close fields"
lazs